The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

GPT-5.2 Pro vs Ling 3.1 Flash

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 42.8.

OpenAI · InclusionAI · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the overall LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 42.8, ranking #15 overall.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose GPT-5.2 Pro

  • you want predictable pricing at $21.00/M input and $168.00/M output

Choose Ling 3.1 Flash

  • overall performance matters — it scores 51.0 and ranks #15 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes agents — it leads those capability indexes
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

GPT-5.2 Pro
OpenAI
Ling 3.1 Flash
InclusionAI
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
42.8
#53
51.0
#15
Reasoning
41.4
#57
47.5
#26
Agents
17.8
#85
38.0
#12
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
$21.00 / M
— / M
Output price
$168.00 / M
— / M
Context window
400,000
—

Individual benchmarks

7 reported for GPT-5.2 Pro · 11 for Ling 3.1 Flash

No common benchmarks found

GPT-5.2 Pro and Ling 3.1 Flashdon't have any common benchmark datasets to compare. They may have been evaluated on different testing suites.

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only GPT-5.2 Pro specifies input context (400,000 tokens). Only GPT-5.2 Pro specifies output context (128,000 tokens).

OpenAI
GPT-5.2 Pro
Input400,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
InclusionAI
Ling 3.1 Flash
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Mon Oct 12 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

GPT-5.2 Pro supports multimodal inputs, whereas Ling 3.1 Flash does not.

GPT-5.2 Pro can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

GPT-5.2 Pro

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Ling 3.1 Flash

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

GPT-5.2 Pro was released on 2025-12-11, while Ling 3.1 Flash was released on 2026-09-30.

Ling 3.1 Flash is 10 months newer than GPT-5.2 Pro.

GPT-5.2 Pro

Dec 11, 2025

10 months ago

Ling 3.1 Flash

Sep 30, 2026

1 weeks ago

9mo newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against GPT-5.2 Pro and Ling 3.1 Flash side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

GPT-5.2 Pro
✓ Preferred
Ling 3.1 Flash
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about GPT-5.2 Pro vs Ling 3.1 Flash.

Which is better, GPT-5.2 Pro or Ling 3.1 Flash?

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 42.8. GPT-5.2 Pro is made by OpenAI and Ling 3.1 Flash is made by InclusionAI. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does GPT-5.2 Pro compare to Ling 3.1 Flash in benchmarks?

GPT-5.2 Pro scores AIME 2025: 100.0%, HMMT 2025: 100.0%, GPQA: 93.2%, ARC-AGI: 90.5%, BrowseComp: 77.9%. Ling 3.1 Flash scores CyberGym: 87.9%, DRACO: 85.5%, FrontierSWE: 75.2%, Multi-Challenge: 69.8%, SkillsBench: 68.7%.

What are the context window sizes for GPT-5.2 Pro and Ling 3.1 Flash?

GPT-5.2 Pro supports 400K tokens and Ling 3.1 Flash supports an unknown number of tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between GPT-5.2 Pro and Ling 3.1 Flash?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (42.8 vs 51.0), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Proprietary vs Unknown). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes GPT-5.2 Pro and Ling 3.1 Flash?

GPT-5.2 Pro is developed by OpenAI and Ling 3.1 Flash is developed by InclusionAI.

Related comparisons